Should we show an interest in the OWS movement?

[Overaged]

Gerry; I don't know what point you are trying to make with these types of verses you are quoting for this discussion. Can you explain pls?

[cardw]

Jesus had contact with other rich people than the "rich young ruler" and Jesus never challenged them like the "rich young ruler". You cannot use this as blanket all encompassing principle to all rich people.

So I doubt Jesus would be saying anything like the "rich young ruler" to other rich people. He never said anything like this to Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus was NOT required as the "rich young ruler" to give up all he had.

If you remember Zacchaeus didn't have to be told. He returned everybody's money at 4 times what he taxed them giving them 400% interest on their money. I think this pretty much drained his nest egg.

What is interesting is that money is one of the most talked about issues in the Bible and you seem to think that the ethics of wealth aren't that important for the rich.

Clearly, in this country, the rich are completely out of balance and essentially are "legally" stealing. That is one of the big 10 and you can't even acknowledge this problem, but instead are looking for loop holes.

You have kind of dug yourself into a hole here. At this point it seems pretty clear that your ego simply can't compromise on any level what-so-ever.

[cardw]

I agree, but we can't know what he would have told the rich people on Wall Street, since he didn't say the same thing to every rich person. We do know, though, that he wouldn't have talked about political issues but of what to do with Christ.

I think you a mixing up Jesus with Paul here.

[John317]

I agree, but we can't know what he would have told the rich people on Wall Street, since he didn't say the same thing to every rich person. We do know, though, that he wouldn't have talked about political issues but of what to do with Christ.

Originally Posted By: cardw

I think you a mixing up Jesus with Paul here.

Think and think again, Richard.

Contrary to popular opinion these days, there was actually no disagreement between Jesus and Paul.

Jesus is the One who said:

John 8:24

I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.

John 6:53-57

So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. [54] Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. [55] For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. [56] Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. [57] As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me."

John 6:47-51

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in Me has eternal life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. [50] This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. [51] I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh."

John 3:14-16

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, [15] that whoever believes in him may have eternal life."

[16] "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:17-21

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. [19] And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil. [20] For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. [21] But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been carried out in God."

John 6:35-38

Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. [36] But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. [37] All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. [38] For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.

John 8:51

Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death."

John 10:27-29

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. [28] I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. [29] My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

[Gerr]

Gerry; I don't know what point you are trying to make with these types of verses you are quoting for this discussion. Can you explain pls?

Someone said it would be interesting to see what Jesus would do in WS or something to that effect. I just brought up one possibility with the James quote, to which you objected. The reason being that He was in the business of saving souls. So I also quoted what He said to the scribes & the Pharisees, yet He was also in the business of saving souls.

[Overaged]

Gerry; I find the view where we think quoting this scripture in reference to "the rich" is a very negative view that portrays the rich as lost already, and gives us nothing by which to give them hope in Christ. It will be Christ who says those words in the end to those who deserve it; and unfortunately there will be church members included in that awful address.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Jesus had contact with other rich people than the "rich young ruler" and Jesus never challenged them like the "rich young ruler". You cannot use this as blanket all encompassing principle to all rich people.

So I doubt Jesus would be saying anything like the "rich young ruler" to other rich people. He never said anything like this to Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus was NOT required as the "rich young ruler" to give up all he had.

If you remember Zacchaeus didn't have to be told. He returned everybody's money at 4 times what he taxed them giving them 400% interest on their money. I think this pretty much drained his nest egg.

What is interesting is that money is one of the most talked about issues in the Bible and you seem to think that the ethics of wealth aren't that important for the rich.

Clearly, in this country, the rich are completely out of balance and essentially are "legally" stealing. That is one of the big 10 and you can't even acknowledge this problem, but instead are looking for loop holes.

You have kind of dug yourself into a hole here. At this point it seems pretty clear that your ego simply can't compromise on any level what-so-ever.

You seem to think that wealth by itself is evil. Is that "reasonable"?

[Overaged]

Good question miz3. There seems to be more than one poster in this topic that thinks this way about people who are "rich."

[cardw]

Jesus had contact with other rich people than the "rich young ruler" and Jesus never challenged them like the "rich young ruler". You cannot use this as blanket all encompassing principle to all rich people.

So I doubt Jesus would be saying anything like the "rich young ruler" to other rich people. He never said anything like this to Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus was NOT required as the "rich young ruler" to give up all he had.

Originally Posted By: cardw

If you remember Zacchaeus didn't have to be told. He returned everybody's money at 4 times what he taxed them giving them 400% interest on their money. I think this pretty much drained his nest egg.

What is interesting is that money is one of the most talked about issues in the Bible and you seem to think that the ethics of wealth aren't that important for the rich.

Clearly, in this country, the rich are completely out of balance and essentially are "legally" stealing. That is one of the big 10 and you can't even acknowledge this problem, but instead are looking for loop holes.

You have kind of dug yourself into a hole here. At this point it seems pretty clear that your ego simply can't compromise on any level what-so-ever.

You seem to think that wealth by itself is evil. Is that "reasonable"?

I said stealing is wrong. I never said being rich is evil.

Your position is so weak that you have to make stuff up. That is called lying. That is bearing false witness and is another one of the big 10.

You can't address the specifics because you don't have an answer. This continues to demonstrate that your ego is so big that you can't compromise even one point.

[miz3]

Jesus had contact with other rich people than the "rich young ruler" and Jesus never challenged them like the "rich young ruler". You cannot use this as blanket all encompassing principle to all rich people.

So I doubt Jesus would be saying anything like the "rich young ruler" to other rich people. He never said anything like this to Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus was NOT required as the "rich young ruler" to give up all he had.

Originally Posted By: cardw

If you remember Zacchaeus didn't have to be told. He returned everybody's money at 4 times what he taxed them giving them 400% interest on their money. I think this pretty much drained his nest egg.

What is interesting is that money is one of the most talked about issues in the Bible and you seem to think that the ethics of wealth aren't that important for the rich.

Clearly, in this country, the rich are completely out of balance and essentially are "legally" stealing. That is one of the big 10 and you can't even acknowledge this problem, but instead are looking for loop holes.

You have kind of dug yourself into a hole here. At this point it seems pretty clear that your ego simply can't compromise on any level what-so-ever.

You seem to think that wealth by itself is evil. Is that "reasonable"?

[ClubV12]

I'm not a big fan of the Tea Party crowd, but I was wondering how many of them were arrested at their various protest gatherings? Over a 1,000 is where we stand with the OWS crowd. I wonder what the difference is?

[Bravus]

That can be interpreted two ways, of course: Tea Partiers turn up with assault weapons to peaceful healthcare meetings and *aren't* arrested, OWS protesters are completely peaceful and are brutalised with clubs and rubber bullets... Hmmm...

Edit: Just to clarify, I know that not all the OWS protestors have been peaceful: in any large, consensus-led movement you'll get a few idiots. My point was simply that there's more involved in the calculation of who gets arrested - like who does the arresting.

[cardw]

OK, you admit that you have not been reasonable.

Second no one is saying "stealing" is right.

Are you saying that "absolutely everyone on 'wall street' is a crook and is guilty of stealing"?

What about the crooks in Washington?

You continue to lie about what I'm saying and call me unreasonable.

This is classic "the pot calling the kettle black."

I didn't say that anyone is saying that stealing is right.

I didn't say that absolutely everyone on wall street is a crook.

I am talking about the dishonest politics of Washington. That is why I talked about campaign finance reform.

You need to quit making stuff up about what I'm saying. You continue to demonstrate the bankruptcy of your belief system when you continue to tell lies about my positions.

I will not enable ignorance in the same way you don't want government to enable dependency. Ignorance is ruining this country and you continue to propagate this uninformed nonsense.

[phkrause]

You continue to lie about what I'm saying and call me unreasonable.

This is classic "the pot calling the kettle black."

I didn't say that anyone is saying that stealing is right.

I didn't say that absolutely everyone on wall street is a crook.

I am talking about the dishonest politics of Washington. That is why I talked about campaign finance reform.

You need to quit making stuff up about what I'm saying. You continue to demonstrate the bankruptcy of your belief system when you continue to tell lies about my positions.

I will not enable ignorance in the same way you don't want government to enable dependency. Ignorance is ruining this country and you continue to propagate this uninformed nonsense.

Don't worry cardw, the rest of us understand exactly what you've been posting and I for one agree with you.

[ClubV12]

The difference between the Tea Party gatherings and the OWS gatherings, I THINK, is that the Tea Party never set up "camp" in any one place and stayed for any length of time? Whereas this seems to be the primary activity with the OWS crowd, "were not moving", which at some point, is a virtual gaurentee of arrests taking place.

In BOTH groups you can find some pretty far out and radical types of course.

[Overaged]

Hey Club - please pardon my stupid question which I am about to ask. But what on earth is this Tea Party? Is this something I don't know about because I am canadian; and is it something I really need to know? Just wonderin...

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

OK, you admit that you have not been reasonable.

Second no one is saying "stealing" is right.

Are you saying that "absolutely everyone on 'wall street' is a crook and is guilty of stealing"?

What about the crooks in Washington?

You continue to lie about what I'm saying and call me unreasonable.

This is classic "the pot calling the kettle black."

I didn't say that anyone is saying that stealing is right.

I didn't say that absolutely everyone on wall street is a crook.

I am talking about the dishonest politics of Washington. That is why I talked about campaign finance reform.

You need to quit making stuff up about what I'm saying. You continue to demonstrate the bankruptcy of your belief system when you continue to tell lies about my positions.

I will not enable ignorance in the same way you don't want government to enable dependency. Ignorance is ruining this country and you continue to propagate this uninformed nonsense.

You are all over the board with no coherent message. I hope your last paragraph will mean that you are dedicated to getting the true facts (something I already have) for yourself so as to have a coherent message in the future.

I am also heartened that you want to get the dishonest politics out of Washington because that is what I have saying all along our discussion. I am glad to see you finally coming over to my side. However "Campaign Finance Reform" is not going to ever get dishonesty out of politics.

The only way is to get the vast money we send in our taxes to Washington back in our hands once again. That will emasculate the money pot that feeds the current Washington beast. The second thing is to get the power back from the Feds and into the States and Local governments where we citizens can keep an eye on what actually is being done.

Keep working on it, eventually you will stand with me more and more.

[cardw]

You are all over the board with no coherent message. I hope your last paragraph will mean that you are dedicated to getting the true facts (something I already have) for yourself so as to have a coherent message in the future.

I give up! LOL

[Overaged]

Originally Posted By: miz3

You are all over the board with no coherent message. I hope your last paragraph will mean that you are dedicated to getting the true facts (something I already have) for yourself so as to have a coherent message in the future.

I give up! LOL

Ah cardw Don't give up now! You have been on this forum long enough to know that everyone here "has a clear message." The only thing we are not clear about is who has the "clearest" one. LOL

[ClubV12]

Overaged, it's political movement tied to the Republicans and, in my opinion, a primary reason the American legislature can't agree on anything. The Tea Party group takes a very hard a firm line and is not willing to give an inch in compromising anything they stand against. Which is basically the "government" in all it's various forms.

I really don't think it's reasonable to compare the two groups, Tea Party vs OWS. Two completely different concepts on how the Government should be run.

Tea Party, in a nut shell, are the white rich angry christian right wingnuts on a mission. Just my opinion of course.

The OWS wants the Tea Party crowd to pay for more welfare, excuse student loans, more big government and less "angry white rich folks".

No two groups could be farther apart on the issues.

[Gerr]

Gerry; I find the view where we think quoting this scripture in reference to "the rich" is a very negative view that portrays the rich as lost already, and gives us nothing by which to give them hope in Christ. It will be Christ who says those words in the end to those who deserve it; and unfortunately there will be church members included in that awful address.

Those were NOT my words. If God did not intend for them to be said, He would not have inspired them. They were intended to be a WARNING, not just to be uttered at the end. Did Jesus intend to give the impression that they were already lost when He said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God?" No. He is giving a warning. As He said, riches is deceitful. It CAN be a huge millstone around the neck of those deceived by it. This is probably the reason God only prospers us only so much. People with unmitigated greed who keep piling up riches can't get it through their heads that you can only sleep in one bed, wear one pair of shoes, eat so much, etc. etc. I think W. Buffet, Turner, and Gates among others, have come to this realization and are using their riches to benefit humanity.

[Overaged]

Well; you go ahead and tell all the rich people you know these verses. i am sure they will "listen" to you readily, and be saved atlast.

BTW, there are "poor people" that are just the way you described the "rich"

[Gerr]

Hey, did I ever say that is the ONLY words that should be said to them? The gospel is not some pabulum. The 3 angels' messages not only carry good news but the threat of judgment as well. Everyone needs to hear the whole package, and that goes for the rich as well.

[Overaged]

They are the words you are emphasizing here.

[Overaged]

Hey, did I ever say that is the ONLY words that should be said to them? The gospel is not some pabulum. The 3 angels' messages not only carry good news but the threat of judgment as well. Everyone needs to hear the whole package, and that goes for the rich as well.

This "whole package" mentality is perhaps a little out of context. Going by the way you seem to put it here; I should go to a dying cancer patient and preach the mark of the beast to him...that would be strange "pastoral care," indeed.